Arizona Governing Committee v. Norris
Significance
Petitioner
Arizona Governing Committee for Tax Deferred Annuity and Deferred Compensation Plans on behalf of deferred compensation and retirement plans
Respondent
Nathalie Norris, on behalf of employees receiving benefits from employee-sponsored retirement plans
Petitioner's Claim
That the state's retirement plan did not violate the Civil Rights Act in paying lower benefits to women than to men, because of women's longer life expectancy.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
James H. Geary
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
Louis J. Caruso
Justices for the Court
William J. Brennan, Jr., Thurgood Marshall (writing for the Court), Sandra Day O'Connor, John Paul Stevens, Byron R. White
Justices Dissenting
Harry A. Blackmun, Warren E. Burger, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., William H. Rehnquist
Place
Washington, D.C.
Date of Decision
28 March 1983
Decision
That a state retirement plan which paid lower benefits to women than to men violated the Civil Rights Act.
Related Cases
- Califano v. Goldfarb, 430 U.S. 199 (1977).
- Spirt v. Teachers Insurance and Annuity Assoc., 735 F.2d 23 (2nd Cir. 1984).
Further Readings
- Garcia, Guy D. "Turning the Sexual Tables," Time, July 18, 1983.
- McCarthy, David D., and John A. Turner. "Risk Classification and Sex Discrimination in Pension Plans," Journal of Risk and Insurance, March 1993, p. 85.
Additional topics
- Arizona v. Hicks - Significance, Impact, Further Readings
- et al. v. W.R. Grace Anne Anderson and Beatrice Foods: 1986 - Taking On Two Giants, Verdict Is Thrown Out By Judge, Judge Denies Request For New Trial
- Arizona Governing Committee v. Norris - Significance
- Other Free Encyclopedias
Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1981 to 1988